MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2019589353 · doi:10.1139/w11-021

Occurrence of both subspecies of <i>Photobacterium damselae</i> in mullets collected in the river Magra (Italy)

2011· article· en· W2019589353 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Laura Serracca, Carlo Ercolini, Irene Rossini, Roberta Battistini, I. Giorgi, Marino Prearo

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAquaculture disease management and microbiota
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpizooticPhotobacteriumBiologySubspeciesOutbreakPopulationMulletVeterinary medicineFisheryZoologyFish <Actinopterygii>VibrioVirologyBacteriaMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The natural reservoirs and biological characteristics of pathogenic populations of both subspecies of Photobacterium damselae in aquatic habitants remain unclear because of difficulties in obtaining pathogenic strains from the environment. In the present study, we assessed the occurrence of Photobacterium damselae subsp. piscicida and Photobacterium damselae subsp. damselae , considered to be the causative agent of past epizootic outbreaks in mullets collected in the river Magra, Italy. Two hundred and seventy-eight mullets were collected during a period of two years (2008-2009) and analyzed using multiplex PCR. During this period, 57% of fishes were positive for Photobacterium damselae subsp. piscicida and 37% for Photobacterium damselae subsp. damselae, with an higher presence in summer months although none of PCR-positive mullets showed clinical signs of disease. Our results indicate that the two micro-organisms are widespread in the population of mullets studied, and this could be a possible cause for outbreaks in favourable environmental conditions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.175 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Microbiology→Same topicAquaculture disease management and microbiota→French-language works237,207→